In the years before September 1999, when negative gearing existed, house prices tracked along at about three times average annual earnings (“Negative gearing in Labor’s sights As Albanese readies for election battle”, September 25). On September 20, 1999, John Howard discontinued indexation of the cost base and introduced a 50 per cent discount on the capital gain for individual taxpayers.
The product of the decision was the creation of a Ponzi scheme where the fastest way to a quick buck was through capital gains on housing. House prices are now more than 10 times the average annual earnings. This investment in housing was not for income from rent but capital gain, and the tax advantages it provides.
To make housing more affordable, unwind the Howard legacy with grandfathering. Those holding property for capital gain will sell because they know all future capital gains will be taxed, as before 1999. This will bring more houses to market. Those selling can realise their gains and move to other investments. The property market won’t collapse, but prices will cease their inexorable rise and, in the not-too-distant future, house prices will return to a more affordable multiple of average annual earnings. Rob Siebert, Skennars Head
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on negative gearing.Credit: Artwork – Marija Ercegovac
Ross Gittins correctly states that demand for housing is growing faster than supply. Capital gains tax has massively increased this demand by making the family home an extremely attractive tax haven compared to other investments such as shares, which create industries and jobs. It’s also an easy target for money laundering, further increasing demand and prices. The distortion is now so high that shares return about twice the income from property, enabling share investors to rent homes offering twice the standard of living of anything they could ever buy. William Lloyd, Denistone
Has federal Labor learnt nothing from the outcome of the 2019 federal election? Why give a free kick to Peter Dutton and his media allies? Evan Parsons, Thornleigh
Labor is to be admired for publicly toying with the idea of changing negative gearing. Given past experience of the campaign waged by the Liberal Party to destroy the policy, Labor is in for a rough ride. There is no doubt that, in order to ease the housing crisis, negative gearing should be banned outright and the capital gains tax discount should be halved. At the same time, dividend imputation should be eliminated. In place of these measures, and to help home ownership become more affordable, full tax deductibility should be applied to mortgage interest on owner-occupied homes. Stephen Healion, Wang Wauk
If the ALP is to fiddle with negative gearing it might encourage investment owners to sell, especially if capital gains taxes are also in for a cut. More property on the selling market. What could possibly go wrong? Genevieve Milton, Dulwich Hill
The consensus is that a large portion of Aussies will not be able to afford to buy a home. So the fix is an adjustment of people’s frame of mind, where that reality is accepted and government and industry should build to rent. The rents are coupled to the CPI (with the expectation that wage rises are a little more than the CPI). Look to Germany for inspiration. Carsten Burmeister Balmoral
I can’t see why governments would not rule out negative gearing for existing properties but retain it for new ones. This would help with supply but reduce taxation returns. Dennis Fardy, Warriewood
I don’t believe it. Is it possible that the Albanese Labor government is belatedly developing a backbone? Ian Ibbett, Wollstonecraft
Where do Labor and the Greens think rental stock comes from? Cut back on negative gearing and you disincentivise investors (which is their point, of course). We sold an investment property when rate increases made it unviable to keep it. An owner-occupier bought it, forcing the young tenants back into the very competitive (and probably more expensive) rental market. Their actions will decimate the sector. Malcolm McEwen, North Turramurra
Proudly problematic
Very proud to be one of the “participants in the problem”, which is how Senator Don Farrell labels donors who support progressive independents’ election campaigns (“Labor slams teals over donations”, September 25).
Not that a South Australian Labor right-wing power broker would ever acknowledge that in 2022 an impressive ACT-wide grassroots campaign not only unseated an ultra-conservative and rather lazy Liberal senator but, more importantly, provided the territory with a conscientious and very effective independent senator, David Pocock. Many Labor and LNP senators would quietly envy his growing popularity and successful engagement with the community.
Farrell and his colleagues could learn a lot from this progressive ACT representative and the teal MPs, since they are recalibrating how politics is done at the constituent and parliamentary levels. Sue Dyer, Downer (ACT)
The most significant reason that independents, including the so-called teals, got up at the last election was not the amount of money they could throw at the electorate. It was, surely, that electors were tired of the “same old” they were offered by the traditional parties. It was also significant that there was a strong grassroots movement in each of these electorates. So, Farrell’s planned reforms will be unlikely to destroy independents’ prospects. Greg Baker, Fitzroy Falls
Don Farrell exemplifies all that is wrong with his “two-party Westminster system of government”. Allowing an electoral system that essentially locks in two parties as the choice for voters has led us to a stymied and constipated system of government where electorate representation has gone by the wayside in preference to securing the dominant factions of one or other of the two “major” parties to be government at each election cycle.
The teals represent a refreshing change of electorate representation and consensus decision-making potential. I am sure Minister Farrell and his cohort shudder at such thoughts of open democracy. Chris Rivers, Port Macquarie
Harm reduction
Why have the police continued their approach to drug policy and enforcement despite the fact the strategy has: failed to reduce supply or drug use at all, made it harder for people with addiction issues to get help, criminalised the nearly half of the population who have taken illegal drugs, and left total control of the drug market to violent criminal cartels (“Gang used cocaine dead drops”, September 25)?
The police commissioner claims that “the supply of cocaine to Sydney has continued to poison this city for years and has fuelled and funded the organised tit-for-tat violence police see today.” In reality, the violence and drug harm is largely driven by the refusal of police and government to deliver any kind of evidence-based policy. Five decades of total failure apparently isn’t quite enough to inspire a new strategy. Peter Stahel, Braidwood (director of Unharm)
CocaineCredit: Getty Images
Top priority
Professor Dwyer’s letter demonstrates a major problem in the provision of health services in NSW (Letters, September 25). Political and administrative lack of insight, planning and execution puts the people of NSW at risk of catastrophic outcomes when the next pandemic hits, as is inevitable. Much of the foundations of our generally good health system lie in the unseen and unheralded services underpinning what happens on the front line. Premier Minns and his colleagues in government and the administrative state should heed the advice being offered, and not stick their collective heads in the sand.
Gary Morgan, Chiswick
Record review
It is very sad to read about the death of a patient at Albury Wodonga Private Hospital (“Ken went into hospital for knee surgery. Three days later, he was dead”, September 25). One must ask how effectively the MyHealth record system is being used. Perhaps an inquiry would be appropriate, including looking at obliging medical practitioners to update it in a timely manner and removing the opt-out provisions. Tom Mangan, Woy Woy Bay
Much to learn
Yesterday’s report on school enrolments raises quite a few questions, including why NSW seems slow to provide schools to meet a growing need (“Public or private? Where students go to school”, September 25). Schools come at quite a cost. Building them is just the start: you then have to run them for decades. It’s a bonus for state treasuries if the federal government pays the running costs, including teacher salaries – which they (and parents) substantially do for private schools. But while the bean counters at the state level might quietly cheer, in overall terms Australian taxpayers aren’t winning – they pay much the same for both public and similar private schools. Meanwhile, the former are underfunded, while the latter are well-funded by both taxpayers and parents. Even if we had tried, we couldn’t have created a more crazy system. Chris Bonnor, Cherrybrook
No surprises that state primary school enrolment in affluent areas has dropped. There has been a flight risk trend for years. Parents increasingly see the state school as a hothouse of undisciplined children, devoid of values, and with crumbling infrastructure. The helicopter parent is still alive and thriving and is well nourished on a diet of media stories about shocking public schools. They want highly disciplined environments for their children, who are often brought up as free spirits, without boundaries. What they miss in the decision to flee is the true egalitarian education that a local public school can bring and the opportunity to teach their own beliefs and values at home. Brian Thornton, Stanmore
Parents often cite the reason they use non-government schools as the values the schools imparts. There is often a mistaken belief that non-government schools have a mortgage on values. Parents choosing public schools also want a values-based education for their children – the value of true inclusiveness that allows an education where their children will experience a microcosm of the real world not influenced by social standing, religion or ethnicity. John Cotterill, Kingsford
Fine not fair
It is the blatant unfairness in the way traffic infringements are issued that gets me (Letters, September 25). Recently, a friend double-parked for 20 seconds to drop an elderly man off outside his house. Result, $320 fine. I live in a street where at least 100 cars double park every morning and every afternoon dropping off and picking up able-bodied schoolgirls, and I almost never see a parking ranger. I’m not suggesting they should all be fined, but some discretion should be allowed. Richard Tainsh, Potts Point
NSW councils’ parking fineCredit: Dallas Kilponen
A week ago, while visiting my heart surgeon, I mistakenly parked in a disabled parking zone. The fine was $682. Next day in the Herald I read that a prominent rugby league player found by the police to have cocaine in his system while driving was fined $682. John Maguire, East Corrimal
Tim Maunsell believes that the cost of parking fines is too high, and uses the example of pulling over for five seconds to drop someone off in a No Stopping zone. But what if it is directly before a pedestrian crossing? That vehicle could block another driver’s view of a pedestrian stepping onto the crossing, resulting in their injury or death. Surely this is a situation that deserves a substantial fine. Susan Hunt, St Ives
Solar solution
The increasing adoption of solar panels in domestic households could be still further increased by supporting the strata community (“Households surge ahead in rooftop solar as renewable projects break bottleneck”, September 25). Currently, households are supported by various government schemes, while taxpayers in strata apartments get no such support. Obviously some of these buildings will provide challenges, but the majority, with the right incentives, could quickly add capacity. Denis Goodwin, Dee Why
Government schemes are being promoted for home owners to have installations at the government’s expense and enjoy dramatically reduced electricity bills. Spare a thought for the poor old renter who is suffering exorbitant rents and is excluded from these schemes. I live on a pension and am at the mercy of the best deal I can get for electricity. Surely there has to be a way for others like me to access the subsidies. Peter Farquhar, Coffs Harbour
With an apparent excess of solar power being generated in the middle of the day, it would seem feasible for an off-peak period to be enabled at that time. This would allow people without solar panels to benefit from cheaper energy prices to heat water, for example. Cheaper prices? Can’t see the power companies getting on board with that suggestion. Neil Reckord, Gordon (ACT)
Rip-offs abound
Any fines for price manipulation by the large supermarket chains should be levied on the directors and the senior executives responsible for the conduct of a company, and not the organisation (Letters, September 25). Fines paid by companies move money from shareholders – including superannuation funds – to government coffers, while those in charge suffer little. Make the ultimate decision makers pay and watch the change in behaviour. Tony Re, Georges Hall
The ACCC accused the two big retailers of targeting families with stretched budgets and seeking discounts.Credit: Bethany Rae
Since the competition watchdog is going after the Colesworths rorts, perhaps it could also investigate the fact that so many AFL grand final seats are allocated in advance to “corporates” rather than the real football fans, and airfares to Melbourne are more than double the normal price. The rip-offs just keep proliferating. Rob Phillips, North Epping
While we are bagging the supermarkets for their obvious price gouging, how have we let them get away with selling ridiculously small eggs in packages marked “large”, even “extra large”? Sure, the price is large, but our poultry industry is in serious trouble if that’s the best our chooks can produce.
Kathleen Hollins, Northmead
Service decline
There is a public bus every 20 minutes from Sydney’s domestic airport going to either Burwood or Bondi (Letters, September 25). But the bus only calls in at the Qantas domestic side of the airport, leaving even a greater walk from the cheaper airlines, through the car park and then to outside the Qantas terminal. It calls into both domestic and international terminals and, especially after the international terminal, is liable to be chockablock with oversized luggage and many international travellers. This compares with the multiplicity of public bus services that used to exist before the airport went private. These services are still on the road, they are just prohibited or restricted from calling into the airport like most private vehicles – another great access inefficiency caused by privatising public assets, but filling the private coffers. Paul Gannon, Coopers Shoot
Lifelong fan
My dad was a South Melbourne supporter and although WWII had ended, he and most of the Australian soldiers were still in New Guinea at the time of the 1945 grand final. After his death we found his diary. “Ten bob on the Swans to win”. Later entry. “Done my dough”. I am looking forward to the Swans winning on Saturday. Josephine Piper, Miranda
- To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
- The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.